MovieChat Forums > Cosmopolis (2012) Discussion > Reasons why this great movie has a only ...

Reasons why this great movie has a only 5 out of 10 stars

posted 12 years ago by marcofrias
20 replies | jump to latest

I'm portuguese so i'm sorry for any mistake I make

This movie is incredible, but it isn't for most people.
The main reasons are:
( There could and should be some exceptions )

1 - Most people that love Twilight and came for Robert Pattinson are to dumb to understand this.
2 - Most people that hate Twilight don't give Robert Pattinson credit as an actor, and don't give credit to none of the movies he's in, and even before seeing his movies think they are awful.
3 - Most people that don't read good books will not understand this.
4 - Most people don't understand Cronenberg, and because they don't understand his movies they automatically think they are bad.
5 - Most people think Cronenberg only makes movies with gore, sex and violence and find his movies offensive.
6 - Most people have been influenced by the Transformers movies, and if a movie is a little slower and more character driven they don't understand it.

I loved the movie and these were the reasons that I tough that made more sense for me. Please post more and argue with me.

[–] sammie1863 12 years ago

I am a Pattinson fan, who saw the film and understood it, read the book, and have seen and enjoyed many of Cronenberg's films. Generalizations and assumptions make you appear disingenuous regardless of you language skills. I do agree that this is a great film, just not for everyone.

[–] mgayles2005 12 years ago

Or the movie just sucks. It's boring and pretentious. characters in a limo ramble and ramble then they disappear forever. There is no plot. Rob Pattinson is boring and wooden. His character's actions make no sense. Awful movie.

You either die a hero, or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain.

[–] merqabah 12 years ago

there is a plot, a billionaire self destructs while trying to grasp the reality the of the new age of cyber-capital, with social uunrest as a background.

he is an emotionless wooden billionare at first, however if you really watched it he starts becoming more human and fragile as his ride goes along.

what action doesnt make sense? as they say in the movie his ego makes it so that when he is self destructing he has to fall lower, smell fouler than everyone

and what movie isnt pretentious?

[–] mgayles2005 12 years ago

nice quoting of the imdb synopsis.

a plot needs conflict, an antagonist, goals, with a story structure ... 2 hours of a man riding around in a limo is not a story.

and I'm sorry ... this movie isn't pretentious ... its a movie for pretentious people to make themselves appear smarter than others

You either die a hero, or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain.

[–] EmotiveCDN 12 years ago

Says the guy with the Batman quote as his signature.

[–] Lin301 12 years ago

mgayles2005 clearly didn't get the movie, too bad for him. I absolutely loved it, but I can see why many do not, it's no mainstream movie which is structured like the set-up mgayles2005 posted but mistakenly usesd as universal rules to film. Cosmopolis is based on literature and keeps that spirit with a lot of dialogue and underlying motives and themes which do not reach everyone

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Xav6101 12 years ago

8 - Most people do not recognize the heartbreaking mirror Cosmopolis shows, in which mankind gradually gets detached from moral and emotional values, because of the overwhelming influence of (cyber-)capitalism and technology.

Xav

[–] blackbeanie 12 years ago

Very interesting remark, Xav!
I've sometimes wondered if one of the reasons a lot of people didn't like the movie was what you've described. They do not recognize or they're reluctant to recognize...

[–] craquebrito 12 years ago

Absolutely agree. Just because we're not billionaires that doesn't mean we do not behave like Eric Packer most of the time. Do you want an example of godlike behavior and contempt? This internet forum. We could be all new world order billionaires the way we condemn others and tell the only truth. People are absorbed in their own cyberlives, Facebook relations, Iphone hearing drones, but when they see a movie theorize about our future in this reality, our reality, they can't connect to it. Reflection is lost to most. Question someone's empty life or society and they refute it plainly, without even questioning it. This movie is the reverse of boring. It challenges you to grasp complex dialogues and real life theories being spit out at the characters faces. I'm not saying it's a perfect movie, but to dismiss it with a 5.8 grade is insulting. Gosh, I'd love to have a drink with Delillo.

[–] blackbeanie 12 years ago

Eric Packer is more amongst us than we like to believe and you're example of the internet forum is spot on IMHO. Many think they are the master of the universe, that their opinion is the one and only truth. Just read some user reviews of this movie. Not that people don't have the right to express their dislike, it's the way they do it.
At least Eric was a real Master of the Universe.
The other characters too reflect issues, present in our society:
- how the creativity of art and money go hand in hand
- the struggle of single mothers in combining work and raising up children and the priorities they have to make and most of time can't make, as is well shown in the scene between Jane and Eric
- how philosophy is at times just that: theory, a way to contemplate about life, far from what really happens, destined for those who can afford it.
- how demanding many jobs are becoming and how difficult it is for many to perform according to the requiremants of their superiors.
(Benno to Eric: "You wanted me to be a helpless robot soldier, but all I could be was helpless")
- how luxe and materialism have become so evident that we, for example, care about the brands of shoes, not anymore about the importance to simply have shoes. Benno threw it in our face, it was confronting, raw but so true.

And I can go on for a while, Cosmopolis is handing over a mirror to us, we just need to look into it.

[–] princeG 12 years ago

Perfect comments above. A cold detached mirror view which we don't very much like.

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] roelax 12 years ago

I do get that this movie and the character of Eric are meant to be a reflection on modern day society and I'm smart enough to understand what the story is trying to say.
the thing is just that the movie is so boring.. there wasn't a single moment where I was gripped by the conversations or the events that happened, while I'm usually a fan of self-destructive characters.
the weird thing is that it had nothing to do with the actors, most were good and Pattison was pretty good, but it's just the story that sucked for me

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] muiia 12 years ago

9. Most people have an IQ over 50

[–] c-avinger 12 years ago

I found Cosmopolis completely unwatchable, and not for any of the reasons the OP listed. I have watched, studied, and enjoyed Cronenberg's films for years, including non-horror films such as A Dangerous Method, which I found dazzling. In fact, I share his work with my students in a college film class I teach, so I doubt I'm simply at an intellectual disadvantage here. I know and respect Cronenberg's work very well, so I am genuinely puzzled as to what happened here. Because of the stilted dialogue and Stepford Wife-like performances, I found the characters I engaging; if there was a true plot moving the film forward, I'm afraid I was unable to comprehend or engage with that as well. That said, I am open to revisiting this film at some point in the future.

[–] tuffysmom 12 years ago

Some of the things I loved about the movie was how cold and artificial it was; its refusal to try to engage us; the constant, ominous feeling of dread; the completely pitiless depiction of our increasingly empty society.

[–] SteveH2002 12 years ago

Because of the stilted dialogue and Stepford Wife-like performances

Those things undercut my ability to appreciate the movie as well. Maybe it made sense, but the actors seemed disengaged, and that didn't help me to engage. I didn't get it, from the actors' manner of reading their lines I'm not convinced they got it either.